Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Another canard by the Left

The blogger Patterico has been on top of correcting the Left and the MSM for consistently trying to rewrite history by stating the Bush administration was claiming Iraq was responsible for 9-11. Just a few days ago, he corrected the L.A. Times.

Many liberals have argued that, by referring to (and allegedly exaggerating) the links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, the Bush administration has deliberately implied that Saddam was behind 9/11. But any such implication is in the eye of the beholder. There is absolutely no doubt that Saddam's regime was a state sponsor of terrorism â€” as the more recent Pentagon report makes painfully clear â€” and after 9/11/01, the Bush Administration decided to go after state-sponsored terrorism in an aggressive way. Back when Americans cared about 9/11, a lot of us felt the same way. I know I did.

This naturally meant that Bush and Cheney sometimes justified the war in Iraq by referring to the fact that, after 9/11, America had decided to go after terrorists rather than wait for the terrorists to come to us. This explanation does not constitute "claims" that Iraq was linked to the 9/11 attacks.

Patterico and others have complained that the Administration doesn't more aggressively defend itself against such unwarranted attacks. The Bush inner circle must believe arguing these fine points is a losing proposition against the anti-war MSM, but I think they are wrong. You can't allow a damaging lie to be created and then cemented without interruption.